King & Conqueror

So much money spent, such a brilliant cast, why turn this incredibly important story into such gung ho fantasy drivel. Really disappointed coming from the BBC.

Some good acting. Apparently filmed in Iceland. Didnt look much like Normandy or England. Nevertheless worth watching if interested in this period.

Sometimes a historical drama gets a few things wrong but is still absorbing and piques one's curiosity about the period. Not here. This is no Wolf Hall. This series is so ahistorical and melodramatic that it's just an insult to viewers. The on and off bromance between Harald and William is farfetched, and every encounter rings false. The known events of this period seem to be distorted or changed outright, when the truth would have been more interesting (see, e.g. Harald's brother Tostig). Then there is the inclusionary casting (the Mercians especially) and the scenes either exaggerating the role of women or voicing frustration with their political status. Of course there is a gay romance. The timeline is absurdly condensed and travel absurdly easy. This version of 1066 is happening in a different dimension. Worst of all is the contrived relationship between the two frenemies, Harald and William.

Why does this show pretend that it's historical? Why not change all the names (they did change at least one) and present it as fully fictional? Actual fiction by Bernard Cornwell or George R. R. Martin has more history in it than this soap opera and is more enjoyable.

I was looking forward to this series based on the advanced publicity and main cast members, however, after watching all 8 episodes on BBC iplayer, I have only awarded 4 stars and that is being generous.

1 It's historically inaccurate.

2 Filmed in Iceland (and it shows) they've used Icelandic Horses which are far smaller than the European horses and Chargers of the day.

3 Costumes aren't accurate.

4 Sound quality leaves a lot to be desired.

I'm afraid if I add more niggles, I may have to award it 3 stars.

I love historic dramas and was looking forward to one set at the time of the Norman Conquest of England.

The story is in no way historically accurate, but I don't mind that, as long as it is well written and believable. The problem is it is not believable - the use of race inappropriate actors for the period totally breaks immersion. Why bother with period costumes if they are going to change the race of characters? Both are equally important for a believable period drama.

There is no evidence at all of Africans at the Battle of Hastings and none in the Norman or Saxon armies. In no way was England "diverse" in the 11th Century.

In the film Prey all Native Americans were played by actors of Native American heritage, in Shogun all Japanese characters were played by amazing Japanese actors. The same respect should be given to white European dramas. I am fed up with these double standards.

I really wanted to love this production & had big hopes BUT a boring script, corny lines, dont do it for me. Most of the actors are capable however a couple are dire (or their lines and the delivery of them is dire)..one character being the young Judith whom Harold's' brother Tostig has taken a shine to. Why is it the trend at the moment for some actors ('Judith')to deliver their lines in such a mind-numbingly flat and boring style with no impact whatsoever that i wonder why they got the role? The script is so dull that you fall asleep. The cast is pretty damn good (Edward Norton & 'William' especially stand out in this) but the whole thing could have been SO much better.